Photography and Money

Marciofs

To those who photograph as work instead of hobby: "Work for exposure" have paid you off?

I am not a professional but at the same time I don't like the idea of people making money with my work when I am not.

Often I receive calls or e-mails of people telling me that they want one of my photos or want I shoot for them but instead of paid with money they tell they are given me the opportunity of exposure. It means they expect make money with your work without paying you in order to have more profit form their own. But my experience tells that work for exposure never pays off, at least not to me. It means, once they look at you as cheap it will be hard to show your value because they will tell everybody you are cheap like: "Hello, you shoot for my friend for free why do you want me to pay that amount of money to press a button?".

I once was contacted by a shop who "invited" me to photograph their products in a day when they would have 10 invited "models" (not even real models) and more than 20 "photographer" disputing space to photograph the models. More than 30 people spend their time for a very poor work for their on and expecting have exposure with a shop who want make profit for their own.

Contacting and paying experienced models, planning my own shoot or shooting with people I can learn with has added much more to my portfolio than doing poor free work for companies who will never really help you while they look only for their own profit.

How is you experience on this?


I also found this video interisting.

Borderfox

Marciofs wrote: »

To those who photograph as work instead of hobby: "Work for exposure" have paid you off?

I am not a professional but at the same time I don't like the idea of people making money with my work when I am not.

Often I receive calls or e-mails of people telling me that they want one of my photos or want I shoot for them but instead of paid with money they tell they are given me the opportunity of exposure. It means they expect make money with your work without paying you in order to have more profit form their own. But my experience tells that work for exposure never pays off, at least not to me. It means, once they look at you as cheap it will be hard to show your value because they will tell everybody you are cheap like: "Hello, you shoot for my friend for free why do you want me to pay that amount of money to press a button?".

I once was contacted by a shop who "invited" me to photograph their products in a day when they would have 10 invited "models" (not even real models) and more than 20 "photographer" disputing space to photograph the models. More than 30 people spend their time for a very poor work for their on and expecting have exposure with a shop who want make profit for their own.

Contacting and paying experienced models, planning my own shoot or shooting with people I can learn with has added much more to my portfolio than doing poor free work for companies who will never really help you while they look only for their own profit.

How is you experience on this?


I also found this video interisting.

Shooting for charities has worked out but all others didn't. I got a call from a racing publication looking for a picture of some trainers, I have them the link to my website and they rang back saying they couldn't pay for them, cue them told to f**k off and don't waste my time.

lisatiffany

In the past a few opportunities backfired and I regretted being involved but after that I learned from my mistakes, unless its a charity or cause I want to help out I make sure to get paid. I just learned to avoid companies and businesses that look at photography as only a mechanical "press the button and its done" process. And instead concentrate on ones that appreciate photography as an art form which can visually help get their product or event out there. There will always be cheapskates who want to waste you're time in every business and in a way its good to experience it early because it prepares you for photography as more than a hobby.

You get it a lot more recently because of the recession and although companies have money they will try and get the service for free if they think they can. Just discuss payment or some kind of compensation first then if they agree get it in writing. My general rule is if its going to take up my time and whomever I'm shooting is going to make a profit from the shots then I too shall benefit, unless of course its a charity.

humberklog

Always makes me smile when a "band manager" asks me to do a shoot, payment being the rather curley currency of Good Exposure.

The band manager's job is to publicise the band. How come fly-by band mangers seam to think they can move into management of photographers too?

This piss poor approach by half arsed band managers should really set alarm bells ringing in the heads of the people in the band that their manager's a Walter Mitty brain-shaped dude.

The manager's not doing his job for the band if he's giving exposure to a photographer. On both counts these scallywags should be given a firm (but fair) flick on the nads.

"Dear Mr. Martin would you produce my band's album (I'm the manager). We can't pay you but the exposure will be fab for you.

P.S Could you get the keys to Abbey Road too?"

pullandbang

Marciofs wrote: »

I also found this video interisting.


I agree with the sentiments in your post, but that video is one of the worst I haven't watched. 14.5 minutes long and the first part is him telling me he doesn't know what he's going to talk about, getting comfortable and having a fag - time to switch off....:rolleyes:

sheesh

there is another way to look at the working for free too. If you are doing it for free for someone they quiet often do not appreciate what you are doing you can get sidelined and treated like crap. If they are paying you they are out to get their monies worth and they get things organised.

It depends if its a charity and you are not getting paid you are usually saving them money by doing promo shots for them and you are not treated like crap.